Josh Wharton - Black Canyon - NO HELMET

john strand wrote:And wearing a helmet doesn't automatically make you safe

John, of course wearing a helmet doesn't automatically make you smart. Seriously, however, I would not recommend that my kid drive around without a seat belt or not wear a helmet while climbing. Head injuries, esp. TBI are rare but the occur and they occur to bleeding edge climbers just like us weekend warriors. Would a helmet have prevented or minimized some of these maybe, maybe not but they damn sure would not have made them worse, so why not stack the odds in your favor as much as possible.

M Sprague wrote:^Alexey, I think the point is to not hang out under other climbers and be aware that a cliff with potentially loose rock and gravel is above so you find a protected spot, not just put on a helmet and say "I'm OK now"

I don't disagree that doing this, to the extent possible, is a good idea. However, I will say that, in the situations you describe, I'd also wear a helmet as an additional measure. I'm not really sure what your point here is...of course, any single measure you take to increase your safety won't be very effective if you take the mentality that it eliminates all the danger and you don't have to take additional precautions...but the same can be said of any of the things you suggested, i.e. "I'm in a sheltered spot (I think...), so I don't have to pay attention any more". Etc.

Brendan Blanchard wrote: This "baseless assumption" actually draws from accident statistics for cars. After seat belts were mandated, there was a dramatic decline in accident injuries and fatalities, which then proceeded to climb to record highs as people adjusted to their newfound "invincibility" behind the wheel...And no, this wasn't a fluke.

"Risk Homeostasis" is the technical term for this concept. The basic idea is that a given person is likely to have a certain level of risk that they are comfortable with. If risk is reduced in one way, they are likely to compensate by increasing risk in other ways. The car seatbelt example is the classic demonstration; the seatbelt makes you feel safer, so you feel ok driving a bit faster. There is all sorts of controversy regarding this concept and where it applies.

I agree with the various posters above who suggest that this concept may be applicable to helmet use in climbing. I know that when I am helmetless in a potentially sketchy situation, such as belaying below a loose pitch on a long route, I am likely to be very aware of this "exposed" feeling and mitigate it by hiding the belay in a sheltered alcove, away from potential rockfall. I may not be be so proactive if I have a helmet to make me feel safe.

Also, your taxicab ABS example was in Munich, not NYC. Another classic example, though.

What are the cons of wearing a helmet?

1. You don't look as "cool" in your photos.

...

and that's it. They are made super lightweight now and with plenty of ventilation that you never realize you're wearing them, so don't argue weight or heat.

I guess you can try to relate it to running it out when not necessary. Saying that the climber is weighing the risk, etc for their own situation. But I always come back to the one con of wearing a helmet. Anytime I'm leading or on multi, mine is on. They're also useful during dusk/dark descents, when you walk into tree branches. Or those times you head butt a roof. etc Many pros, only one con (for me).

Its also polite that as a belayer you have one on, so if you get hit by a little rock or a dropped biner, etc, its only a nuisance and not a "OMG my belayer just got knocked out" situation.

JCM wrote: "Risk Homeostasis" is the technical term for this concept. The basic idea is that a given person is likely to have a certain level of risk that they are comfortable with. If risk is reduced in one way, they are likely to compensate by increasing risk in other ways. The car seatbelt example is the classic demonstration; the seatbelt makes you feel safer, so you feel ok driving a bit faster. There is all sorts of controversy regarding this concept and where it applies. I agree with the various posters above who suggest that this concept may be applicable to helmet use in climbing. I know that when I am helmetless in a potentially sketchy situation, such as belaying below a loose pitch on a long route, I am likely to be very aware of this "exposed" feeling and mitigate it by hiding the belay in a sheltered alcove, away from potential rockfall. I may not be be so proactive if I have a helmet to make me feel safe. Also, your taxicab ABS example was in Munich, not NYC. Another classic example, though.

I understand this argument, and I agree that it may be applied to many outdoor situations (avy gear is a very good example). However, the problem is with our psychology - not the piece of protective equipment! Which means that, the way to address the problem is to fight this tendency that we know ourselves to have - not to stop taking measures to increase our safety.

I am certainly not telling people not to wear helmets, by the way. As far as motorcycle helmets and seat belts, I personally think it is crazy not to use them, but with those two you are choosing to enter the very objective danger of public roads and likely pushing the speed far past anything close to safe. When in a climbing situation where you are able to reduce the hazards greatly, then it makes sense to weigh the cost benefits and maybe not wear one. In a more risky situation, then it is more like riding down the road. I don't wear a helmet while sitting on a stool, while it would be safer if I was to fall off and hit my head. Do you wear safety googles while frying up something on the stove?

M Sprague wrote: Do you wear safety googles while frying up something on the stove?

Nope, but I sure do when I'm working in the lab! As you say, it's a cost-benefit analysis. I admit I don't always climb (or belay) with a helmet either. It depends on nature of the crag, number of people, etc. However, I don't assume that people who do choose to wear them in place I don't are just noobs who have no idea of their surroundings...

Alexey Dynkin wrote: May I ask, where do you guys get this idea from? Personally, I couldn't care less if you or anyone else chooses to wear a helmet or not, but please don't make baseless assumptions about why others make decisions! Hint: I don't know a single person who puts on a helmet and thinks it'll save them from being squashed by a 2-ton block, so let's stop using that silly and irrelevant example...

Wrong for 2 reasons:

1. Assumptions on human behavior are typically made by projecting our beliefs.
2. It has been shown in many helmet wearing sports that people behave differently when they wear helmets. Look at spearing in football. Not too many helmetless climbers will head butt an off width - well Strand maybe.... But if you are wearing one you might think quite as much about where you belay from, walking away when you are off rappel, being under others in general......

M Sprague wrote:Any statistical evidence that people wearing helmets are all around safer? Obviously if beaned in the top of the head it helps, but do they also make people pay less attention to not being beaned, or otherwise take more risky actions? They certainly have there place, but I see too many times when they seem to skew people's judgement about their safety. It is more important to not get hit or smash into the wall (or ground) then wear a helmet. Personally, I hardly ever wear one. I do so mostly on multipitch routes that are not my own, so not personally cleaned, or sometimes when initially rapping in from the top to prep projects. Otherwise I usually don't, but am very careful to be aware of my surroundings. Having gumbies preach at me probably makes me not want to wear them, if anything.

I equate this to the air bag effect in automobiles. As statistics have found, drivers are not as cautious in a car that has an airbag than one without and tent to get into more minor accidents. Take crossing the street for example. Where are you most likely to be hit by a car? Using the crosswalk! Because it is featured as a safe place to cross. Jay walkers are more vigilant about looking both ways and have heighten awareness. Simply human nature.

Pnelson wrote:For one reason or another, climbing has yet to make the move into "helmet culture" the way that skiing has in the last decade, or cycling in the last 35 years. I'm not sure why, and we'd probably be better off all wearing them. That said, I usually don't on single pitch or often multi, and most of my partners do not either. I've seen a lot of climbers that are VERY judgmental and smug about wearing helmets, which annoys me. I'll also say that, during an accident report, whenever someone asks if the victim was wearing a helmet, I get the same smug, condescending vibes that I get when someone asks "what was the rape victim wearing?"

Tour de France mandated helmet wear after one of the cyclists died after a crash ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre…). Prior to that, if you watch the old footage, no one wore a helmet. Since that change, it has affected helmet wear in the general population too. I can't remember the last time I saw someone in a group ride without a helmet, albeit in my own limited circle. I suspect having media coverage of every professional athlete wearing a helmet in the most important race of the year helped making helmet wear the norm even for amateur cyclists.

If IFSC did the same thing and made athletes wear a helmet while in competition, I would guess it would change helmet wear amongst average climbers too and make wearing a helmet even while sport climbing the norm. The change won't be fast, but it would trickle down.

EDIT: Of course the difference there is wearing a helmet while cycle gives some aerodynamic advantages compared to not wearing one. So that might have helped the adoption as well.

It seems likely that a pro climbers sponsor would ask them to remove their helmet during a photo shoot. And possible that the pro climber normally wears one at most other times. But who knows.

All the talk about seatbelt studies and helmet studies reminds me of the theory I once heard that airlines require people to tuck their head in their lap during an emergency situation NOT because it improves their chances of surviving a crash but because it decreases the chances of injury while increasing the chances of death. This reduces their liability because deceased victims families don't sue as agressively as severely injured victims.

Jim Turner wrote:It seems likely that a pro climbers sponsor would ask them to remove their helmet during a photo shoot.

That would be a very irresponsible thing to do & BD should get the wrath of every climber if that was true. I doubt that's what it is though. More than likely, it was a personal choice, which may lean against wearing a helmet when being filmed. (Notice the belayer at least had a helmet in some of the shots).

On the other hand, when you are a pro athlete, especially when marketing to the participants (instead of the spectators), I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a measure of social responsibility. Whether helmet is truly warranted or not, the appearance of safety precaution should be taken when being filmed.

Jim Turner wrote:\ NOT because it improves their chances of surviving a crash but because it decreases the chances of injury while increasing the chances of death. This reduces their liability because deceased victims families don't sue as agressively as severely injured victims.

Jesus! Now I'm just scared. I'm gonna wear my helmet on planes from now on.

Eric Engberg wrote: Wrong for 2 reasons: 1. Assumptions on human behavior are typically made by projecting our beliefs. 2. It has been shown in many helmet wearing sports that people behave differently when they wear helmets. Look at spearing in football. Not too many helmetless climbers will head butt an off width - well Strand maybe.... But if you are wearing one you might think quite as much about where you belay from, walking away when you are off rappel, being under others in general......

Not sure what else to say here, except that I've already addressed these points in my other replies. If you want to rationalize not wearing a helmet because you think it'll make you less attentive to potential hazards, by all means do so, it's none of my concern. Meanwhile, I will continue to wear one when I feel like getting by head bonked by something is a distinct possibility, and what assumptions people make about my thought process for making that decision is even less of a concern.

Jim Turner wrote:It seems likely that a pro climbers sponsor would ask them to remove their helmet during a photo shoot. And possible that the pro climber normally wears one at most other times.

Uhhh... no.

Maybe my brains fried from multi pitch in the heat today but what I'm hearing is nobody's wearing a helmet this winter? That's gangsta!

Maybe we should just let this one go into the "first world problems" and move on.

"You think a helmet would save you from a two ton rock?"

Like seat belts helmets reduce injury and deaths with studies to back it up. No matter what application. Dozens of climbing helmet models wrap down over the ears as well as the base of the skull. I am a paramedic and see plenty of bicycle riders who get hit by 2 ton cars traveling 30-40-50mph or crash with more energy than you realize. Helmets don't ever hurt. A glancing blow from a 10 ton boulder may not kill you but would avulse your skull without a helmet on. Snowboard, ski, climb, Mtn bike, Moto, racing cars etc. Helmets are never a bad idea nor not worth wearing. Seems slightly ignorant to suggest they don't work for anything other than overhead impacts...etc.

The choice to wear a helmet is up to the individual.

Rob T wrote: That's a pretty arbitrary point. The same line of thinking could be used to discourage films showing soloing, runout leads, loose rock or skipped clips. I like seeing these films, if you don't, feel free to skip these in addition to any non-helmeted film, but I'd ask you not to require the rest of us to watch these dumbed down products.

Thank you.

I feel like I am at a PTA meeting

Mike Brady wrote: I feel like I am at a PTA meeting

Yeah, but without the MILFs.